Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology

2014 Edition
| Editors: Claire Smith

Local Populations and Global Heritage

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1224


In the 1990s, postmodern concerns with subjectivity, power relations, and pluralism gave rise to ethical interests in examining how people who live near and among archaeological remains understand, appropriate, and actively use them in sociocultural, economic, and political contexts. Since that time, scholars have designed projects to gain specific insights into how people use the material past to construct, perform, and maintain distinctive, “local” identities in an increasingly globalized world, the ways in which they contest, appropriate, and negotiate political and economic interests in relation to tourism and heritage management policies, as well as how they situate their pasts in relation to “world” history and human origins. As a result, the integration of “local” concerns, values, and beliefs has become a routine part of heritage management practices, especially at United Nations Economic Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Sites (WHS)....

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Appadurai, A. 1996. Modernity at large: cultural dimensions in globalization. St. Paul (MN): University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  2. Appadurai, A. (ed). 1986. The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Breen, C. 2007. Advocacy, international development and world heritage sites in sub-Saharan Africa. World Archaeology 39: 355-70.Google Scholar
  4. Breglia, L. 2005. Keeping world heritage in the family: a genealogy of Maya labour at Chichen Itza. International Journal of Heritage Studies 11: 385-98.Google Scholar
  5. Edgeworth, M. (ed.) 2006. Ethnographies of archaeological practice. Walnut Creek /CA): AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  6. Gazin-Schwartz, A. & C. Holtorf. (ed.) 1999. Archaeology and folklore. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Handler, R. 1988. Nationalism and the politics of culture in Quebec. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  8. Himilakis, Y. 2009. What is archaeological ethnography? Public Archaeology 8: 2-3.Google Scholar
  9. Hodder, I. 1986. Reading the past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Holtorf, C. 2009. A European perspective on indigenous and immigrant archaeologies. World Archaeology 41: 4.Google Scholar
  11. Jones, S. 2004. Early medieval sculpture and the production of meaning, value and place. Edinburgh: Historic Scotland.Google Scholar
  12. Mcclanahan, A. Forthcoming. The ethics of landscape: discourses of cultural and environmental sustainability at the heart of Neolithic Orkney world heritage site, in T. Regi (ed.) On the list: world heritage, tourism and identity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Narkunas, J.P. 2007. Utilitarian humanism: culture in the service of regulating ‘we other humans’. Theory and Event 10: 3.Google Scholar
  14. Rowlands, M. 1998. The archaeology of colonialism, in K. Kristiansen & M. Rowlands (ed.) Social transformations in archaeology: global and local perspectives: 327–33. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Samuels, K. 2008. Value and significance in archaeology. Archaeological Dialogues 18: 1.Google Scholar
  16. Trigger, B. 2006. A history of archaeological thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Further Reading

  1. Muke, J., T. Denham & V. Genorupa. 2007. Nominating and managing a world heritage site in the Highlands of Papua New Guinea. World Archaeology 39: 324-38.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Edinburgh College of ArtUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK